Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southern Military Institute


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep per WP:HEY, WP:GNG and near-unanimity among respondents'''. Non-admin closure by the skomorokh  16:42, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Southern Military Institute

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article is about a proposed military academy that never got built. Proposals and fundraising began in 1997 and nothing has come of it yet. There were a few articles written about it in 2003 when it seemed like it might actually move forward, but there was also a suggestion that it was a front for raising money for the neo-confederate movement. This is the only reliable source still available and it's rather speculative, talking about plans that have never been implemented.[ http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33793 ] I suggest that we delete the article until the school becomes more than just a pipe dream or a promotional tool. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 07:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Wikipedia is not a crystal ball into the fantasy world in which the school was actually built. CRGreathouse (t | c) 18:20, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The references still exist in print, even though most may no longer be available on the Internet, so it passes the general notability guideline. Even if the institution never admits a student, the attempts to create it are themselves notable. -- Eastmain (talk) 20:25, 23 October 2008 (UTC) And there are plenty of other references in reliable sources available at this Google News archive search. -- Eastmain (talk) 20:37, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I think its shown there was national interest in this. And there should be yet further sources--I remember it was widely discussed at the time in the relevant specialist publications. Once notable, always,and even a proposal can be notable. DGG (talk) 03:52, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep One case where it doesn't matter if the school gets built or not; the circumstances around its origins and ongoing controversy are well sourced to NYT articles and others still available on a |Google news search. Flowanda | Talk
 * Keep This may not be notable as a school (because it isn't a school, at least not yet), but the sources establish its notability as a real or alleged racist, sexist, and/or neoconfederate initiative. --Orlady (talk) 17:31, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.